Supreme Court: Misusing Religious Conversion for Reservation is Constitutional Fraud

The Supreme Court has ruled that religious conversion undertaken solely to access reservation benefits, without genuine belief or adherence to the adopted religion, is a misuse of constitutional provisions and undermines the purpose of reservation policies.

In a recent verdict, the court denied a Scheduled Caste (SC) certificate to a woman born as a Christian who claimed to be Hindu in her application for a government job in Puducherry. Upholding a Madras High Court order, the bench, comprising Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice R. Mahadevan, stated that such practices contradict the essence of reservation policies and amount to constitutional fraud.

The court remarked, “A dual claim, where an individual professes Christianity but identifies as Hindu solely to gain SC benefits, is untenable. Granting Scheduled Caste status to someone embracing Hinduism only for availing reservations undermines the very objective of the policy.”

The appellant argued that she was born to a Hindu father and Christian mother, both of whom later practiced Hinduism. She claimed that her family belonged to the Valluvan caste, and her father and brother held SC certificates. However, the court found evidence that her father, originally from an SC community, had converted to Christianity. The appellant herself was baptized in 1991, shortly after her birth.

The court emphasized that individuals converting to Christianity lose their caste identity unless there is clear proof of reconversion to Hinduism, accompanied by recognition from the original caste. In this case, no evidence supported such reconversion. The court observed, “The claim of resuming caste status upon reconversion requires more than assertions; it demands concrete evidence of ceremonies or public declarations, none of which were present in this case.”

Also Read: Sambhal violence: Police release photos of rioters including three women

The judgment reinforces the principle that reservation benefits are designed to address systemic social disadvantages and cannot be misused through insincere religious conversions. The court’s decision highlights the need for strict adherence to constitutional principles to maintain the integrity of reservation policies.